Article

2003-04-20 Iraq

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Frank G 2003-04-20 09:27 am|| || Front Page|| [5 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Also an excellent Op-Ed on OpinionJournal by Francis Fukuyama - time to get US troops out of Saudi Arabia

Posted by Frank G 2003-04-20 09:35:44|| 2003-04-20 09:35:44|| Front Page Top

#2 Amen. My first impulse is that we should melt the electronics and pothole the ramps and runways while we're walking out the door, too. I know how they say that they paid for it. So fucking what, is that first response... Without us, it would seem, the whole lot would return to the sand in a few years. But, since they will need SOMEONE to protect their totalitarian regimes, they'll have to make nice with the Russians or similar... So I think that first gut feeling was the correct one: destroy the bases as / after we leave.

H2 & H3 certainly will provide convenient basing. We can cache whatever we want all over the western desert, too - and we can do it without leaving a trace. For that rainy day... Yeah, I know it's desert... Rains there, too, folks, like a MoFo sometimes.

I think that we should open up the air route options by taking Syria / Lebanon - and put the REAL cure to the Hamas & Hezbollah issue: state sponsorship. Think Iran is getting friendly now? Wait till you knock off their partners in crime: Syria & NKorea. We would receive the equivalent in diplomatic relations of an Inari Vachs or Bobbi Bliss incredibly messy / wonderful / noisy blow-job. It would reverberate throughout the remainder of the Arab world - and no doubt the Islamic world, as well. Hey, we're already the Great Satan. It WILL be Us vs Them (and I hate cliche's as much as you do!) someday soon. Might as well get a leg up and put down our markers. We'll find out if they can stand or if they fold.

Leaving Saoodi behind will be a HUGE move - it changes the nature of our relationship. No longer the Special Relationship of WW-II to now, it gets THEM out of the middle of our Phreaking Phoreign Policy - and that is something we've needed to happen since 1973 when we were punished for Israel's outfuckingstanding military success. Can you say embargo? How about, "You backed the Ireali's! You are our blood enemies!" Remember? There was ZERO doubt that we WOULD, but they were surprised - and incredibly pissed off - when we DID! Fucking duplicious fantasist jerkwads.

Of course, if we're going to be "crucified" by everyone, West and East alike, for being imagined imperialists, oil-hungry thieves, etc... perhaps we should just go ahead and take it. Take it all. Iraq. Saudi. Shit, where should we actually stop? France? Germany? Anything stupid enough to pop up on the radar screen should get clipped or swallowed...

Maybe. Just thinking aloud in the old "what if" mode. I'd LOVE to see what real planners with real data have come up with...

Posted by PD 2003-04-20 10:23:19|| 2003-04-20 10:23:19|| Front Page Top

#3 I will agree with you, PD on getting out of Saudi. The big finance boys (no need to say "persons" in the Middle East) in ME are/were Iran, Iraq, and Saudi. We took care of Iraq. Heat is being racheted up on Syria and Iran, but we need to get out of Saudi. Without our technical expertise, the Kingdom, at least the military part will go down the drain. We have to cut off the sources of terrorist money, and getting Saudi out of the picture will also put the heat on Pakistan, which is a client state of us and the Saudis.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2003-04-20 11:34:59|| 2003-04-20 11:34:59|| Front Page Top

#4 In the name of security, efficiency, and expediency, I am willing to suffer the "slings and arrows" of being called an imperialist. I've called the opposition worse.

Posted by Tom 2003-04-20 13:12:46|| 2003-04-20 13:12:46|| Front Page Top

#5 Something just popped up on my radar screen. Please feel free to take potshots at it, but I think one of Bush's goals is to cripple OPEC. He can do it, if he controls Iraqi oil, or has a strong hand inside the government of Iraq that will do it for us. That, and opening up the ANWAR for drilling, which I expect soon, even if it takes a Presidential Executive Order. The Congress of the United States is too busy pandering to the loonie left fringe. We're already seeing the hand of George Bush in our Environmental policy re the forestry issue.

Not saying it's chiseled in stone, but it makes sense. A crippled OPEC is one less weapon in the hands of the islamofascists.

Posted by Old Patriot 2003-04-20 15:10:58|| 2003-04-20 15:10:58|| Front Page Top

#6 Old Patriot---I do not know about your hypothesis of Bush's goal of crippling OPEC, but if we had ANWR on line and the Nat'l Petroleum Reserve to the west of Prudhoe Bay on line, we would not miss Saudi Oil plus change. The enviro weenies have been successful in blocking ANWR on a very emotional basis, which has played well in Washington. Modern directional drilling and the use of insulated ice pads and drill roads has drastically reduced the footprint of oil wells and the impact on the land. We need to seriously get our oil sources away from ME while they transition to more rational beings. We meaning everyone but the middle eastern countries. It is bad policy to depend on obtaining the life blood of modern civilization from psychopaths.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2003-04-20 16:57:53|| 2003-04-20 16:57:53|| Front Page Top

#7 Bashur and H1 make sense. Well located, isolated from large population centers, and basically out of the way.

Bashur keeps N Syria, Turkey and N Iran in reach.

H1 is good for NE Saudi, Jordan, the western desert of Iraq, and coverage of Damascus and the inland population areas of Syria (coastal reas, we have carriers).

None needed around Basrah - Kuwait can host the troops there, and possibly a Seabee & Coastguard detachment at Umm Qasr.

But we do need on central-south (Saudi) and a truly central one, and possibly one more between the Kurdish area and Basrah near the central and southern Iranian border.

Nasirrah or An Najaf fulfills the south central - but the truly central one being Baghdad International? I dont want a large US military base in the middle - attracting all the loonies.

I'd say find something NE of the city itself - look at the airfields there, and the road reach. Plus its in reach of Iran.

Posted by OldSpook 2003-04-20 22:33:36|| 2003-04-20 22:33:36|| Front Page Top

#8 I can see it now:
Shut down and withdraw from Saudi,Germany,and Turkey.
Establish 4 permanent basis's in Iraq.

Saudi:removes one of Osama's motives(won't make a difference to Osama,but chips away at his legitimecy).Bases not needed,Iraq is more stratigically located.U.S. no longer has to make nice with the Saudi's.

Turkey/German bases.Nice to have but not worth the headache.Both country's economy hurting, withdrawl and shutting down U.S. bases would put a serious dent in thier economy.

Iran/Siria:Have apopaliptic fits causeing heart palpitations.

Luv it,warms the cockles of my heart.

Posted by raptor 2003-04-21 09:25:46|| 2003-04-21 09:25:46|| Front Page Top

17:41 The Doctor
17:37 tavosi
13:47 Anonymous
13:45 Anonymous
00:00 Anonymous
12:03 Tresho
11:58 Tresho
09:54 raptor
09:49 raptor
09:43 raptor
09:25 raptor
08:34 anon1
08:31 liberalhawk
08:27 raptor
08:22 anon1
08:14 PD
08:13 anon1
08:04 raptor
08:01 PD
07:44 Anonymous
07:37 raptor
07:32 PD
07:13 PD
07:07 raptor